Previous daf

1)

(a) According to Rav, a Yevamah acquires his Yevamah completely with any of the inferior Bi'os mentioned in our Mishnah; according to Shmuel, he only acquires her regarding the two points mentioned in the Parshah.
Which two points?

(b) One of the three ramifications of 'le'Potrah min ha'Yibum' is that should the Yavam die having had children from another wife, she is Muteres le'Shuk.
What are the other two?

(c) In which third regard does he acquire her according to Rav?

(d) Why (according to the first Lashon), does even Shmuel agree that he acquires her completely if she fell to Yibum after they were married?

(a) Having established the Machlokes between Rav and Shmuel by a Yevamah who fell to Yibum after *betrothal*, Rav holds that the Torah includes Bi'as Shogeg like Meizid.
What is Shmuel's reasoning?

(b) What will Shmuel say in a case where the Yavam performed a proper Bi'ah?

(c) Shmuel's previous statement conforms with another statement made by Rav Nachman in his name.
What did he say?

(a) According to the Tana of the Beraisa, if a bas Yisrael was betrothed to a Kohen, is she permitted to eat Terumah (after the marriage) if ...

1. ... he became a Cheresh before the marriage?
2. ... if he married her, and then died, and she fell to a Yavam who was also a Cheresh? Why is that?

(b) According to what we just said, Rav Nachman Amar Shmuel will have a problem with this Beraisa the way it stands.
How does he amend it?

(c) And how will he now explain the final words of the Beraisa 'be'Zu Yafeh Ko'ach ha'Yavam mi'Ko'ach ha'Ba'al'?

(a) In the second Lashon, Rav and Shmuel both agree that if she fell to Yibum from the betrothal, she is not permitted to eat Terumah.
What is then their Machlokes?

(b) How do we now amend the statement of Rav Nachman quoting Shmuel, who said that whenever the husband fed his wife, the Yavam may feed his Yevamah?

(c) Rav will explain the Beraisa (which permits a bas Yisrael who fell from a Kohen who had become a Cheresh before they were married, and who then fell to his brother who was a Cheresh, to eat Terumah), like Shmuel explained it in the first Lashon.
How will Shmuel now explain it?

(a) When (under which circumstances) is a bas Yisrael married to a Kohen who became a Cheresh before the marriage, permitted to eat Terumah?

(b) According to the Chachamim, if her son dies, she may no longer eat Terumah. How does Abaye refute Rabah, who explains that Rebbi Nasan permits her to eat because, since she has already eaten, she may continue to do so?

(c) Why indeed, do we not apply the Sevara of 'Ho'il she'K'var Achlah'?

(d) And on what grounds does Abaye refute Rav Yosef, who explains Rebbi Nasan's reason to be because intrinsically, the marriage of a Kohen Cheresh feeds his wife Terumah, and Chazal did not decree on the marriage of a Cheresh on account of betrothal (which does not)?

7)

(a) What did Rav Sheishes teach Rav Amram about the wife of a Yisrael who was raped?

(b) How did he understand the Seifa of our Mishnah, which says that the same applies to someone who has relations with one of the Arayos? What did he think 'the same applies' referred to?

(c) We try to refute his proof by explaining that 've'Chein ... ' refers to Ha'ara'ah or to unnatural relations with any of the Arayos.
Why can that not possibly be correct?

(d) To what else might 've'Chein ... ' refer, negating Rav Sheishes' proof?

(a) How do we amend Rabah's statement: 'Eishes Kohen she'Ne'ensah, Ba'alah Lokeh Alehah Mishum Zonah'?

(b) From where do we know that an Eishes Yisrael who was raped is permitted to her husband?

(c) What does the Tana of the Beraisa learn from there with regard to an Eishes Kohen?

(d) How does Rabah answer Rebbi Zeira, who asks from the Beraisa, where it appears that an Eishes Kohen who was raped is no more than a 'La'av ha'Ba mi'K'lal Asei' (which is only an Asei) and not the La'av of Tum'ah?

10)

(a) According to the Tana Kama (Rebbi Meir), the moment a Kohen Gadol betroths a bas Kohen who is a widow, or a Kohen Hedyot, a divorcee, they (the women) are forbidden to eat Terumah.
What do Rebbi Elazar and Rebbi Shimon say? What is their reason?

(b) Assuming that this Machlokes extends to a bas Yisrael (who is permitted to eat Terumah when she becomes betrothed to a Kohen, according to the Mishnah Rishonah in Kesubos), why do/es ...

1. ... Rebbi Meir forbid them to eat Terumah?
2. ... Rebbi Elazar and Rebbi Shimon not forbid them to do so?

(c) Why do Rebbi Elazar and Rebbi Shimon concede that, once they marry, she is forbidden?

(d) Should either of them divorce her or die after they are married, the bas Kohen remains forbidden to eat Terumah, and the bas Yisrael, to marry a Kohen.
What will Rebbi Meir hold in a case where they died after the betrothal (but before the marriage)?

(a) Rebbi Meir learns the prohibition of the above women to eat Terumah (or to marry a Kohen) even after Eirusin from a 'Kal va'Chomer'.
Which 'Kal va'Chomer'?

(b) On what grounds do Rebbi Elazar and Rebbi Shimon reject Rebbi Meir's 'Kal va'Chomer'?

(a) What does Rebbi Elazar Amar Rebbi Oshaya maintain regarding, whether or not, a Kohen who is a P'tzu'a Daka (whose Beitzim are crushed) may feed the bas Yisrael whom he betrothed, Terumah?

(b) On what grounds do we refute this explanation?

(c) Why can we not answer that here too, he is able to feed a bas Geirim?

Next daf